TL;DR
Compare a delivered diagnostic audit with the assignment you agreed to. Check its coverage, trace one finding from observation to verified defect, and separate useful corrections from unsupported explanations. Accept the work, return it for evidence or accept a clearly limited portion; an impressive score alone cannot settle that decision.
Start with the agreed assignment
This review happens after an external audit is delivered. It is different from selecting an agency, designing a prompt sample or evaluating a recurring performance report.
Find the brief: services, locations, platforms, question set, observation method and expected output. If those boundaries were never agreed, acknowledge the gap. You cannot fairly reject work for missing an unspoken requirement, but you can require unsupported conclusions to be narrowed.
An audit can be complete without showing favorable visibility. Conversely, a flattering result can be incomplete if its method or evidence is missing. Judge the diagnostic work separately from the practice’s performance.
Reconcile promised and delivered coverage
In a fictional assignment, the brief specifies questions, offices and platforms that must be covered. The delivery contains completed observations alongside recorded tool failures. A failed attempt is evidence of an incomplete check, not a positive or negative visibility result. Compare the agreed observation list with the completed records and identify every gap.
The provider has preserved useful failure evidence, but the agreed coverage remains incomplete. Decide whether the missing observations should be collected under the original method or whether you will accept the report with an explicit coverage exclusion. Do not silently change the denominator or substitute easier questions to make delivery appear complete.
This is a contract-scope check, not a market-wide measure of visibility. A separately agreed observation sample still has limits even when every row is present.
Trace one important finding all the way through
Suppose the same fictional audit says, “An assistant directs visitors to an unavailable evening consultation.” Ask for the complete chain:
| Evidence step | What the hypothetical delivery shows | Acceptance judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Observation | Exact question, dated answer and cited location page | Observation can be inspected |
| Source text | The linked page still advertises evening consultations | Citation supports that factual statement |
| Operational verification | Scheduling owner confirms that evening availability ended | A correct replacement fact is available |
| Proposed action | Correct the location page and check related scheduling text | Action addresses a demonstrated defect |
| Claimed cause | Report also says missing schema caused the wrong answer | Unsupported by the evidence shown; return this explanation |
The correction can be useful even when the causal explanation is unproven. Google says its AI features do not require special schema; absence of special markup alone is not a diagnosis. Google’s AI features guidance.
A missing mention needs different treatment. Without a demonstrated page or factual problem, it remains an observation to investigate, not automatic proof that the practice needs more articles.
Make the acceptance decision explicit
For this example, a reasonable written decision is: “Accept the verified evening-availability finding for the correction queue. Return the unsupported schema explanation. Accept the coverage summary only with the missing observations clearly excluded, or complete those observations before closing the assignment.”
Assign an owner and evidence requirement to each outstanding item. The audit provider should supply missing diagnostic evidence; operations approves practice facts; an implementer handles separately authorized changes. Accepting a report does not authorize website edits or approve every recommendation in it.
Keep the accepted version and its exclusions together. Later discussions should not turn a limited diagnostic acceptance into a claim that all services, locations or assistants were comprehensively assessed.
Frequently asked questions
Must a completed audit prove what caused every AI answer?
No. It should distinguish what was observed, what was verified and what remains unexplained. Clear uncertainty is more useful than an invented cause.
Can we accept part of an audit?
Yes, if the assignment permits it and the accepted scope and outstanding work are explicit. Have the responsible commercial owner resolve any contractual question.